The importance of nonsexist writingAnd why, if you’re a good writer, it doesn’t have to make your stuff awkward

My eighth grade English teacher Mrs. (“... no, no, no,” she fumed, “not Ms. ...”) Antoniazzi drilled into the class that in cases of unknown or mixed gender, we were to default to him and his. Always. That was the prevailing rule in 1968. (Yes, I am that old.) It no longer is, but plenty remain who bristle at having to approach gendered terms with care. If you happen to be male—odds are roughly 50/50 that you are—it’s understandable if you don’t quite get what the fuss is about. Slights and their sting often pass unnoticed by the non-slightee. For that matter, slightees can become inured, too. More than once at table in the early 70s, my stepmother, hopping-to ere Dad’s coffee cup ran low, would spit out, “Women’s lib! What do they need to be liberated from? Our first mistake was giving them the vote.” If you will not concede that women suffer negative effects from a default to masculine terms, I shall defer to Mrs. Antoniazzi, who told the unhappy girls in our class, “Rules are rules, and that’s the rule.” If rules are rules, then when rules change, so must we. Defy new rules at the risk of being branded, not altogether unjustly, a sexist dinosaur.* Many writers recoil at the awkwardness of the his or her construction. But usually (not always), his or her is naught but the lazy writer’s default. In most cases, you can do better with just a little bit of thought and skill. Here are some suggestions.The Nix the Possessive Pronoun Technique: Instead of the everyone took his or her seat, how about everyone took a seat.The Find the Neuter Word Technique: Instead of mankind and womankind use humankind. Instead of workman use worker. Instead of chairman use chair.The Make It Plural Technique: Instead of the customer likes his or her sandwich made fresh you can say customers like their sandwiches made fresh.The Break Down and Rewrite Technique: For that matter, you can say customers like fresh-made sandwiches.The Let Go of Your Favorite Cliché Technique: I don’t care if you grew up saying old wives’ tale. It is sexist and then some. Try nonsense, untrue, fiddle-faddle, claptrap, questionable, baloney, myth, hogwash, bull...** Sexist expressions are good at taking writers unawares. It takes vigilance to recognize them and root them out. When in doubt, find a with-it slightee and ask, “Is this wording sexist?” Don’t argue with the answer.*** Better yet, when in doubt, rewrite. All you need is a little creativity. You’re in advertising. Creative solutions is what you’re about. Oh, and quit pouting about having to do it. Pouting is unbecoming.

—Steve Cuno *There is no shortage of ways to brand yourself a sexist dinosaur. A friend asked me to review an early draft of a marketing book he was writing. To illustrate the importance of incentive offers, he attempted a humorous take on the Old Testament story of Saul’s having offered a daughter to David as an incentive to kill Goliath. I advised my friend that joking about women being awarded as property was offensive. He retorted, “I hate that politically correct crap.” Hate it he may, but readers who feel otherwise are free to express their ire by not buying his book or retaining his services.

***Speaking of rewriting, I originally wrote that sentence, Don’t argue when they answer. But that didn’t agree with the preceding “with-it slightee,” which is singular. And the last thing I wanted was Don’t argue when he or she answers.

Still, make sure the language really has changedA followup to December 10’s post

In my December 10 post I argued for learning to live with the dynamic nature of language. The correct meaning and use of a word are determined by how a sufficient number of people use that word today, regardless of limits under which it may have functioned yesteryear.

But let’s not be absurd. If you out-and-out misuse a word, you cannot hide behind the dynamic nature of language. In my college days, my roommate insisted that transvestite referred to a person who had undergone a sex change. When I settled the matter with an appeal to the dictionary, along with a look at the etymology of the root word vest, he could not bring himself to concede. “OK,” he said, “but that’s changing.”

In the above-referenced post I took care to note, “It still matters whether you use affect or effect, discrete or discreet, compliment or complement, and their or there or they’re.”

Language changes. Live with it.

Today a friend sent me a link to a recent diatribe by Joel Hilton on the subject of word abuse. Since my employees oft call me a word nazi, he thought I’d get a kick out of it. Right he was. I enjoy pieces like this. Honest. I get them. Still, I am compelled to reply to the likes of Mr. Hilton, “Oh, come on.” To cling to a word’s original meaning to the exclusion of emerging ones is to commit the Genetic Fallacy. A word’s definition and use are determined by how large numbers of people define and use it, regardless of what your dictionary may have to say about it. Dictionaries, after all, do not lead but follow the language.

So it is that when Hilton opines that the “... only time we should use the word ‘viral’ is when we immediately follow it with the word ‘infection,’” I opine right back, “Nonsense.” Viral as used in the social media is correct precisely because vast numbers of people understand and accept it that way. There is a fine line between holding to correct use and being an immovable grouch who denies the dynamic nature of language. It still matters whether you use affect or effect, discrete or discreet, compliment or complement, and their or there or they’re. But there need no longer be any shame in using over in place of more than,anxious in place of eager, and, in place of the decidedly snobbish and reactionary it is to be hoped, using hopefully. When enough people misuse a word or assign it a new meaning, the new use becomes correct. That is how language works. Witness what gay meant not long ago as opposed to what it commonly means today. Decimate offers another example. And consider that today it’s acceptable to say It’s me; one utters the technically correct It is I at the risk of sounding weird. Though I shudder at the thought — admitting to a bit of the entrenched pedant myself — literally may well be on its way to meaning figuratively but emphatically ... infer to meaning imply ... ironic to meaning gut-wrenching ... comprised to meaning composed ... and so forth. Confusion, even outrage, naturally erupt during any transition. But if criteria is destined to become acceptable as a singular as well as a plural, my advice is to sit back, relax and enjoy the phenomena.—Steve Cuno